D&D 5E WotC's Jeremy Crawford on D&D Races Going Forward

On Twitter, Jeremy Crawford discussed the treatment of orcs, Vistani, drow and others in D&D, and how WotC plans to treat the idea of 'race' in D&D going forward. In recent products (Eberron and Wildemount), the mandatory evil alignment was dropped from orcs, as was the Intelligence penalty. @ThinkingDM Look at the treatment orcs received in Eberron and Exandria. Dropped the Intelligence...

Status
Not open for further replies.
On Twitter, Jeremy Crawford discussed the treatment of orcs, Vistani, drow and others in D&D, and how WotC plans to treat the idea of 'race' in D&D going forward. In recent products (Eberron and Wildemount), the mandatory evil alignment was dropped from orcs, as was the Intelligence penalty.


636252771691385727.jpg


@ThinkingDM Look at the treatment orcs received in Eberron and Exandria. Dropped the Intelligence debuff and the evil alignment, with a more acceptable narrative. It's a start, but there's a fair argument for gutting the entire race system.

The orcs of Eberron and Wildemount reflect where our hearts are and indicate where we’re heading.


@vorpaldicepress I hate to be "that guy", but what about Drow, Vistani, and the other troublesome races and cultures in Forgotten Realms (like the Gur, another Roma-inspired race)? Things don't change over night, but are these on the radar?

The drow, Vistani, and many other folk in the game are on our radar. The same spirit that motivated our portrayal of orcs in Eberron is animating our work on all these peoples.


@MileyMan1066 Good. These problems need to be addressed. The variant features UA could have a sequel that includes notes that could rectify some of the problems and help move 5e in a better direction.

Addressing these issues is vital to us. Eberron and Wildemount are the first of multiple books that will face these issues head on and will do so from multiple angles.


@mbriddell I'm happy to hear that you are taking a serious look at this. Do you feel that you can achieve this within the context of Forgotten Realms, given how establised that world's lore is, or would you need to establish a new setting to do this?

Thankfully, the core setting of D&D is the multiverse, with its multitude of worlds. We can tell so many different stories, with different perspectives, in each world. And when we return to a world like FR, stories can evolve. In short, even the older worlds can improve.


@SlyFlourish I could see gnolls being treated differently in other worlds, particularly when they’re a playable race. The idea that they’re spawned hyenas who fed on demon-touched rotten meat feels like they’re in a different class than drow, orcs, goblins and the like. Same with minotaurs.

Internally, we feel that the gnolls in the MM are mistyped. Given their story, they should be fiends, not humanoids. In contrast, the gnolls of Eberron are humanoids, a people with moral and cultural expansiveness.


@MikeyMan1066 I agree. Any creature with the Humanoid type should have the full capacity to be any alignmnet, i.e., they should have free will and souls. Gnolls... the way they are described, do not. Having them be minor demons would clear a lot of this up.

You just described our team's perspective exactly.


As a side-note, the term 'race' is starting to fall out of favor in tabletop RPGs (Pathfinder has "ancestry", and other games use terms like "heritage"); while he doesn't comment on that specifically, he doesn't use the word 'race' and instead refers to 'folks' and 'peoples'.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

And you can actually spot Neo-Nazis amongst the Asatru faith by how much they idolize the Greeks and Romans as part of our "shared European heritage".

I will point out that neither Greco-Roman slavery, nor Ancient Germanic slavery, had very much in common with the "modern" racialized chattel slavery... which was invented by Christian Europeans centuries later. They didn't enslave people on the basis of their "race" and they didn't use pseudo-theological or pseudo-scientific justifications for why it was okay to enslave some people and not others-- they enslaved anyone they could, either as people or as peoples, and the only justification was that they could.

I'm not going to sit here and defend slavery, but ancient slavery was a damned sight less hypocritical than modern slavery.
Slavery was slavery, wherever it was practiced. The Greeks, Romans, and Germanics definitely did target certain nationalities for slavery, and their writers did invent pseudo-theological and pseudo-scientific justifications for it -- Aristotle and St. Augustine being particularly notable examples.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Orcslayer78

Explorer
2020 Orcs and Drow will no longer be evil, all the encounters with these races ancestries will be peaceful because we believe that imaginary races ancestries from european folklore are related to racist problems in the United States, we also do not believe that changing european folklore is cultural appropiation.

2022 Unintelligent monsters will not be killed anymore because they don't understand what's going on and they just try to defend their habitat, also killing unintelligent monsters like magical beasts has heavy similarities with hunting animals for sport. From now on they will be referred to as mythological creatures because the term monster is offensive and negative.

2024 The U word (for undead) is banned, now you will refer to them as ex-living and they will no longer will be associated to negative energy because it implies that there is something wrong with their existence

2026 D&D 6E comes out, it will no longer have a combat system because it may incite to real life violence, there will not be weapons anymore as well because we do not believe in them. All the encounters will be resolved with peaceful debates, while there will not be evil races ancestries or monsters mythological creatures combat is no longer required in this edition of Dungeons&Dragons.
 
Last edited:

Minigiant

Legend
Supporter
Well, and that is forcing a topic into an artificial guilt by association conflict. Drow cannot be racist in a RL sense, because they are purely fictional.

But of course they* behave racist in game versus almost all other races (*The classical FR drow not the Eberron drow in this case), that is trivial and makes them more despicable in a classic campaign.

Fictional races could be racist if they were designed to be or inspired by it.

Drow aren't through. They are an mock up of the dark ef of Germanic/Norse myths.

No, the problem with Drow is that they make no sense and used to be one of the most iconic images for dark skinned individuals in DnD.
Drow are and still are stupid.
 

Fictional racist could be racist if they were designed to be or inspired by it.

Drow aren't through. They are an mock up of the dark ef of Germanic/Norse myths.

No, the problem with Drow is that they make no sense and used to be one of the most iconic images for dark skinned individuals in DnD.
Drow are and still are stupid.
Skin of drow makes no sense underground. A Wizard did it. They have no sense of right or wrong.
 



Fictional races could be racist if they were designed to be or inspired by it.

Drow aren't through. They are an mock up of the dark ef of Germanic/Norse myths.

Drow dont come from Norse myths.

The Norse myths about "Black Elves" or "Dark Elves" have nothing to do with skin color. (The black elf is pale with black hair.)

Heh, as a citizen of racist America, Gygax assumed that "black" referred to skin color, but he completely misunderstood that text.

It is precisely the context of American racism that made Gygax not even realize the mistake.
 


You mean Shirley’s comment about ”ignoring the hate crime”? Shirley, whose stereotypically underinformed social/religious conservatism is a consistent comedic device? (Kind of like Betty White’s Rose from Golden Girls.)

Or were you meaning Pierce’s “Al Jolson“ crack? Pierce being a stereotypical racist, bigoted, misogynistic jerk with zero self awareness of how awful he is?

Again, merely darkening one’s skin for the purpose of a role foes not equal the blackface of minstrelry. Saying Chang’s Drow is the same as the stuff Jolson (and others) did is like saying Cheetas and Spotted Leopards are the same based in their spots.

The lack of using makeup & costume to accentuate stereotypical features; the lack of offensive mannerisms...the similarities are literally only skin deep. It’s almost meta-racist to claim all incidents of using black makeup look alike when major differences at plainly obvious.
I think the humor of Community is sharp enough that Shirley and Pierce can be wrong and right at the same time. What you say about them is true, but their identification of this as a probable reaction to Chang is clearly correct, given the conversation about it we're having now. Whether we're supposed to laugh at them for their simplicity, laugh at Chang for his insensitivity, or both, is up to us. Everybody is entertained, everybody who gives it a second thought is a little bit uncomfortable, it's just good satire at work.

(Nice hat, by the way.)
 

The Dungeon Masters was something I watched. A lot of time was wasted but it was not a bad watch. One of the DMs wore drow make up exclusively for LARP. And DMing. She gave no indication she was racist. Only identified as drow for gaming. Fully black make up. So not realistic skin tones.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Remove ads

Top